41 



The reasons for the protection of the berried lobster have 

 been stated and restated in the reports submitted to the 

 Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee. The following may 

 now be advanced in further evidence of the good results likely 

 to follow from protecting the berried lobster. 



Taking again the North Eastern district for comparison with 

 Northumberland. In the former the lobster is protected from 

 1st September to 1st February, a season which from the Board's 

 results and our own gives practically no protection at all. In 

 both districts the size limit has been raised to 9 inches, and in 

 the Northumberland district the berried lobster is protected for 

 the months when it is mainly in evidence, viz., from 1st April to 

 3 1st July. We have therefore by the incidence of these bye-laws 

 a means of contrasting the effects of protecting the berried 

 lobster. There is no necessity for referring to the evidence in 

 detail. It was given in the report for 1904, and in the 

 following reports, the last paper on the subject having bean 

 given in the report for 1909-10, p. 21. In these papers it was 

 pointed out that five years after the passing of the bye-law, viz., 

 in 1904, Northumberland took the first position with reference 

 to the landing of lobsters on the east coast of England, replacing 

 the North Eastern with its much larger sea board in this respect. 

 Northumberland has occupied the first position since, that is 

 during the last eight years, and the North Eastern has sunk into 

 the third position, the Eastern having advanced into the second 

 place. This in spite of the fact that it is more than probable 

 that the northern portion of the North Eastern district benefits 

 from the protection given by the Northumberland bye-law. 

 The following figures will bring the evidence furnished in the 

 reports for 1904, and for 1909-10 up to 1911 :— 



There can be no question in the face of this evidence of the 

 desirability of j)rotecting the berried lobster. The contrast tends 

 to show, moreover, that it is more important to protect the 

 berried lobster than to raise the size limit from 8 to 9 inches. 



If it be found then that the statements in the paper 

 emanating from the Board with reference to the protection of 

 the berried lobster are not supported by the facts, the remarks 



